Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40790201›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Ethical considerations and robustness of artificial neural networks in medical image analysis under data corruption.

Michael Okunev, Doron Handelman, Amir Handelman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Michael Okunev *Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Holon Institute of Technology, Holon, Israel.
Doron Handelman *Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Holon Institute of Technology, Holon, Israel.
Amir HandelmanFaculty of Electrical Engineering, Holon Institute of Technology, Holon, Israel. handelmana@hit.ac.il.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Medicine is one of the most sensitive fields in which artificial intelligence (AI) is extensively used, spanning from medical image analysis to clinical support. Specifically, in medicine, where every decision may severely affect human lives, the issue of ensuring that AI systems operate ethically and produce results that align with ethical considerations is of great importance. In this work, we investigate the combination of several key parameters on the performance of artificial neural networks (ANNs) used for medical image analysis in the presence of data corruption or errors. For this purpose, we examined five different ANN architectures (AlexNet, LeNet 5, VGG16, ResNet-50, and Vision Transformers - ViT), and for each architecture, we checked its performance under varying combinations of training dataset sizes and percentages of images that are corrupted through mislabeling. The image mislabeling simulates deliberate or nondeliberate changes to the dataset, which may cause the AI system to produce unreliable results. We found that the five ANN architectures produce different results for the same task, both for cases with and without dataset modification, which implies that the selection of which ANN architecture to implement may have ethical aspects that need to be considered. We also found that label corruption resulted in a mixture of performance metrics tendencies, indicating that it is difficult to conclude whether label corruption has occurred. Our findings demonstrate the relation between ethics in AI and ANN architecture implementation and AI computational parameters used therefor, and raise awareness of the need to find appropriate ways to determine whether label corruption has occurred.

Indexed as

Diagnostic ImagingImage Processing, Computer-AssistedNeural Networks, ComputerAlgorithmsArtificial IntelligenceHumansArtificial neural networkChest X-ray imagesDataset sizeEthicsLabel corruption

Identifiers

PMID40790201
PMCPMC12339967

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.